Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Priyanka vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:25861) on 24 June, 2024
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:25861]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1293/2024
1. Priyanka D/o Shri Hanuman, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Ward No. 11, Matka Mohalla, Laxmipura, Bundi, Presently
Residing At Meera Circle 9 Q 3, Nay Patel Nagar, Bhilwara,
Raj.
2. Kishan Lal Lohar S/o Shri Ratan Lal Lohar, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Meera Circle, 9 Q 3, Naya Patel Nagar, Dist.
Bhilwara, Raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Ministry Of
Home Affairs, Jaipur, Raj.
2. Director General Of Police, Govt. Of Rajasthan Police Head
Quarter, Jaipur
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Malpura
4. The Superintendent Of Police, Bundi
5. The Superintendent Of Police, Jaipur
6. The Superintendent Of Police, Bhilwara
7. The Station House Officer, P.s. Duni, Dist. Malpura
8. The Station House Officer, P.s. Muhana, Dist. Jaipur
9. The Station House Officer, P.s. Pratapnagar, Dist. Bhilwara
10. Seetaram Lohar S/o Satyanarayan Lohar, R/o Anita
Colony, Rampura Road, Sanganer Road, Jaipur
11. Hanuman S/o Ramniwas Lohar, R/o Bijoliya, Tehsil Dhani,
Muhnamandi, Jaipur
12. Avinash Lohar S/o Hanuman Lohar, R/o Bijoliya, Tehsil
Uniyara, Dist. Tonk, Presently Residing At Surat
13. Prem Devi W/o Hanuman Lohar, R/o Bijoliya, Tehsil
Uniyara, Dist. Tonk R/o Keero Ki Dhani, Muhanamandi,
Jaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naresh Charniya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mool Singh Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR (VACATION
JUDGE) Order 24/06/2024 (Downloaded on 19/07/2024 at 08:38:29 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:25861] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1293/2024] The criminal writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction for being provided with adequate security and protection.
The petitioners both being major persons claim to be in a live in relationship. They submit that they are living with each other against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel threat at the hands of private respondents, who are their relatives. The petitioners allegedly approached the concerned respondent authorities with a prayer to be provided with adequate protection but no heed has been paid to their request so far.
The documents pertaining to the age of the petitioners and an ikrarnama verifying the factum of them being in a live in relationship have been filed on record. Thus, taking cue from the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522, the prayer made by the petitioners for directing the concerned respondent authorities to provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
The concerned respondent authorities shall have the matter enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection shall be provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The concerned respondent authorities shall ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners, who are in a live in relationship.
The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR (VACATION JUDGE)),J 131-Hanuman/-
(Downloaded on 19/07/2024 at 08:38:29 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)